Hello, debate community. I'm Sam. I debated for four years in high school for Nevada Union during which time I made two TOC appearances. I did not debate for Berkeley during my time there, but I was an assistant coach for the College Preparatory School from 2002-2006. 2010-2011 was my first year back. During my time with CPS, I judged a ton of rounds at a ton of tournaments. I was off the circuit for a few years because I moved to Hong Kong for a bit and then went to graduate school at Brown. Feels nice to rejoin this amazing community. I live in Chicago now, and I coach for New Trier.

Some Specific Things:

I'll yell "clear" at you if you're not being clear.

I'll disclose my decision and talk about the round with you in depth afterwards. I remember getting a lot out of post-round discussions when I was a debater, and I hope I can pass something along.

I'll look at evidence, sure, but I will be grumpy if you make me sort out a huge rat's nest of implied and unexplained clash for you. I am a big believer in directly responsive line-by-line debate. I am the kind of judge who thinks that one strong, well-developed argument can be more important than three weak, underdeveloped ones. I think that explaining warrants is good, but comparing warrants is better.

I'm up for any kind of argument. I love a good K debate, but I'm equally pleased to adjudicate a game of competing policy options. Run what you love. I will say that offensive/amoral arguments irritate me, but I'll try to keep that out of my decision.

I like it when clash happens on the line-by-line as opposed to in the overviews.

I seem to have a marginally higher threshold on T than others do.

I think that there's a performative/communicative aspect to this activity. Speak persuasively and your points will improve.